Intellectually Lazy

All sources are biased, and most have false information.
Especially those from antiquity/ pre modern eras.
If you discounted all sources for biased and or false info, youd have no sources.
Would it be nice if all sources were entirely correct/ unbiased? Absolutely, but we work with what we're given.

>>1925469
I guess you're right, but I was more talking about something that is wrong a majority of the time, let's take an extreme example and say a source is wrong 99% of the time, if they provide evidence to why they reach the conclusions they do would I be obliged to still look into them or would I be allowed to dismiss them out of hand?

>>1925442
would you continue buying food from people who shit in your food?

>>1925513
Im going to assume that your interested in classics and antiquity, so we'll use Vegetius.
Vegetius, if you didnt know, is one of the few sources we have on the late roman empire. This presents a problem because he is wrong a lot of the time. He is a non-military man writing about the military, most probably out of a yearn for the classical ages rather than a conclusion that the empire is turning to ruin.
There is still a lot we can take from Vegetius though. First of all, we can cross reference sources: Vegetius tries to tell us that Romans stopped using armor. Should we use this as fact? No. What we can do though, is think about the fact that something made Vegetius think that legionaries werent using armor, and then cross reference other sources to trying and pull the fact from the statement.
Ideally, all sources would be cross referenced with each other to ensure accuracy, but obviously this is not really possible given the time it would take.

>>1925520
how attractive are they? would they be maintaining eye contact? what kind of food? would I get a discount? you gotta throw out some more deets here son